Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN 4
MSNBC 4
MSNBCW 4
CSPAN2 2
KNTV (NBC) 2
WRC (NBC) 2
LANGUAGE
English 21
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)
those gentlemen to michelle obama and michael bloomberg shining a light on childhood obesity and an added benefit of having famous voices attached to the cause helped shine the light on it anymore? >> i think the jury's out and we have famous faces in the film and coming out soon and we hope it brings people to the theater and if that's what it takes, great. famous people and celebrities, great chefs in the nation working really hard on this issue. but they've been working to get people to increase the charitable response and the truth is that charity, even increasing it by tenfold could not take on the problem and fix it. if we're feeding people, they're still hungry the next day and the next day until we look at the system and how it's broken and fix that. >> if there's one thing that people could really take away from that film, if there's one thing to impress upon the country out of this film, what would it be? >> i would say if there's one thing to take away is citizen activism works. we saw the results of what happened in the late 1960s, in particular around this issue.
. >> president obama, his last campaign promise to the american people, the final debate, this is what he said about sequester. >> first of all, sequester is not something that i proposed. it's something that congress has proposed. it will not happen. >> he said it will not happen. you're preparing for it to happen. it seems paul ryan was just on "meet the press" last week and he said it's more likely to happen than not. in your view, is this going to happen? >> in a world of responsible politics, it should not happen. >> ok. we don't live in that world right now. are you assuming it's going to happen? >> look, we've got to plan for that possibility. because there are so many members that are saying we're going to let it take place. but i have to tell you, it is irresponsible. for it to happen. i mean, why in god's name would members of congress elected by the american people take a step that would badly damage our national defense? but more importantly, undermine the support for our men and women in uniform. why would you do that? >> general dempsey, you have said this would be catastrophic.
are an important part of the approach that the obama administration has followed and congress has supported, and it appears that sanctions are producing tremendous pressure on iran. another statement which has raised concern is senator hagel's recommendation that we conduct, "direct, unconditional, and comprehensive talks with the government of iran." now, while there is value in communicating with our adversaries, the formulation used by senator hagel seemed to imply a willingness to talk to iran on some issues that i believe most of us would view as non-negotiable, and any willingness to talk to iran would need to be highly conditional. senator hagel's reassurance to me and my office that he supports the obama administration's strong stance against iran is significant. we look forward to hearing senator hagel today in some depth on that subject. we will also be interested in hearing senator hagel's statement on the public statements is made on israel and the united states, that our policy of non-engagement with the syrians as, "isolated us more than the syrians," and a 2009 statement that
a conversation. he was in minnesota today. >> obama: we may not be able to prevent every massacre or random shooting. no law or set of laws can keep our children completely safe. but if there is even one thing we can do, if there is one life we can save, we've got an obligation to try. >> you know, i'm going to ask you both to listen to what went on as well. the president is taking the position that he wants to reach out. he wants to have a conversation with america. this was the beginning a 15-minute speech in minnesota. he went on to talk about the things that aren't being done that we don't know is being done. do you know for six years we have not had anybody confirmed as head of the atf of alcohol and tobacco and firearms? >> since they have not confirmed a director of alcohol tobacco and firearms in six years. they should confirm todd jones. >> how important is that? tell me why it hasn't happened and how important it is that we have someone in place. to a layperson it may seem like a figure head. >> it's interesting. that's an interesting question. i don't equally know how much the at
>> president obama has nominated chuck hagel to replacereplace leon panetta as e secretary. mr. hegel is a war veteran. he served in the senate until 2009. after his senate career, he became part of a foreign-policy think tank. at his confirmation hearing today, he had some back and forth with former colleagues, including senator john mccain. that exchange is about an hour and a half into the hearing. later, we will get your thoughts about the nomination and hearing on our phone lines at 11:00 p.m. eastern, 8:00 pacific. carl levin chairs the armed services committee and makes the opening statement. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> good morning, everybody. the committee meets today to consider the nomination of former senator chuck hagel to be secretary of defense. before i begin, i want to first welcome senator inhofe as the new ranking republican on our committee, succeeding senator mccain. senator mccain has been a great partner over the past six years, and i thank him for all the work he has
about the president obama and congressional leaders pressed their way about the public life at the fellowship foundation national prayer breakfast in washington. the annual event with president eisenhower. we also hear from johns hopkins director dr. benjamin. this is 90 minutes. [applause] ♪ ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states and mrs. michelle obama. ♪ [applause] [applause] >> good morning. we've had a wonderful time together to discuss issues. thanks for your attention. it's overwhelming -- >> [inaudible] >> yes, have a seat. please, sorry. [laughter] >> thank you. >> it's overwhelming to think of the pathway that each person took to get to this event today. some from little villages halfway around the world, and some from just 12 blocks away. thank you. this event taken place for 61 years now began with a group of people that happened to be leaders wanting to get together for breakfast and prayer. one thing i know for sure is life is complicated and is likely to get more complicated. but as the senate of the weekly prayer group we've learned taki
. and later, president obama and congressional leaders speak at the fellowship foundation's prayer breakfast. testified about the attack thon u.s. consulate in benghazi, libarch that killed ambassador stevens and three other americans. the pentagon never received the request from the state academy for security, and did not have the resources to get support on the ground in time to thwart the attackers. leon panetta is stepping down. this hearing is four hours and 15 minutes. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> good morning, everybody. today the committee welcomes secretary of defense, leon panetta, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, general martin dempsey. to testify about the department of defense's response the deadly terrorist attack on the u.s. temporary mission facility in benghazi, libya, last year. and the findings of its internal review following that attack, including lessons learned from benghazi. we will be receiving testimony next tuesday morning on the impact of sequestration and/or a full-year continuing resolution on the department of defense wit
, staunchly defending the obama administration's use of drones against americans. >> i would like to ask you about the status of the administration's efforts to institutionalize rules and procedures for the conduct of drone strikes, in particular, how you see your role as cia director in that approval process? >> the president has insisted that any actions we take will be legally grounded, will be thoroughly anchored in intelligence, will have the appropriate review process, approval process, before any action is contemplated, including those actions that might involve the use of legal force. >> the fifth amendment is pretty clear. no depreivation of life, liberty or property without due process of law. we are threatening american lives with a drone attack. >> if the executive branch makes a mistake and kills the wrong person or a group of the wrong people, how should the government acknowledge that? >> i believe we need to acknowledge it. i believe we need to acknowledge it to our foreign partners. we need to acknowledge it publicly. >> i have been on this committee more than 10 years. with
and practices the obama administration has followed are quite stringent and are not being abused. who is to say about a future president? i think this idea of being able to execute an american citizen no matter how awful, having some third party having a say or perhaps and forming the congress or the intelligence committee, something like that. some check on the ability of a president to do this has merit as we look towards the longer- term future. >> we are taking your calls on drone strikes. robert is waiting on the line from miami, florida. hello. go ahead. caller: yes. host: what do you think? caller: they said that are targeting americans? , yes.that's right moving on. on the independent line from wisconsin. caller: hello. i think once you start to kill americans were designed to americans, you become an enemy. if you are a citizen of the united states, you have become the enemy. i do not see anything wrong with using drone strikes to take them out. i just do not they have done a good job, i believe. host: what do you think? you should be in charge of the program and targeting american cit
with president obama and he ordered all available d.o.d. assets to respond to the attack in libya and to protect u.s. personnel and interests in the region. it's important to remember that in addition to responding to the situation in benghazi, we were also concerned about potential threats to u.s. personnel in tunis, tripoli, cairo, sanaa and elsewhere that could potentially require a military response. in consultation with general dempsey, and africom commander general hamm, i directed several specific actions. first, we ordered a marine fleet earnt terrorism secure team, a fast team, stationed in spain to prepare to deploy to benghazi. a second fast platoon was ordered to prepare to deploy to the embassy in tripoli. a special operations force, which was training in central europe, was ordered to prepare to deploy to an intermediate staging base in southern europe, siginela, and a special operations force based in the united states was ordered to deploy to an intermediate staging base in southern europe as well at s rimbings ginela. some ask why other types of armed aircraft were not dispatche
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)